Doctor Destiny

Seems legit.

That may be so but we're at the top of list. Seriously.

And that's perfectly valid. I never said it wasn't. If it turns into a pay to win game, I'm jumping ship myself.

I hope it doesn't and they find that everything was done illegally. I want someone to show the US that they can't **** with whoever please just because they feel like it.

I'm a completionist. Besides, they won't make anything off of it now.

We're talking about video games, not eternal damnation. Like ACK said, vote with your wallet, not butthurt.

Games for Windows Live. >_> Anyhow, playing through Red Alert 3 all the way finally. Had the game since release and never did finish it. xD

I doubt this will happen. Sounds more like an unsubstantiated rumor at this point.

Your concern is valid. A "pay to win" scenario is effectively destroying the advantage of a free to play model so I'm hoping against hope that EA will avoid that situation. Cosmetic changes probably won't be included but I wouldn't mind things like new armies being included after release for a nominal fee so long as they're balanced versus the other sides. I wouldn't even be averse to buying SP content as long as it's worth my goddamn money. Gearbox's Borderlands DLC is a good example of how SP additions should work. Tons of gameplay for a low price.

It just seems like every little change gets scrutinized and dismissed before it even has a chance. There's an equally high probability that EA can actually deliver the right experience. I want to have hope but I have no expectations whatsoever for C&C 2013. If the game sucks, the game sucks and I'm not out anything.

When everywhere I go that covers C&C has a majority of people complaining, I'm going to note that. I only call it as I see it.

While not an "established series" per se, TF2 went to a free to play model and no one complained, except people who bought it. I don't see a new model as the problem. It's the potential issues with microtransaction markets and outrageous DLC prices. And with that, I would actually agree with you but being completely averse to an idea because it's that different is kinda stupid. People don't like change. Pretty damned obvious.

If it was anyone else, you'd be all gung ho about giving it a chance but mention EA and everyone's going to be pissed off. Check out that bias. Not that I don't partially agree in some regards, but it deserves a chance at least.

Like I said on Skype, you can go ahead and "not accept it" all you want but it won't change a damn thing. I don't get why people are so stubborn about everything.

Do you even know what a reboot is?

ugh. So much junk floating around. ......... Primal Fear - Unbreakable (Part 2) [unbreakable]

That's... what a reboot is...

I know I do, and with good reason. I will always prefer Red Alert.

The mechanics for Relic, Blizzard and Westwood/EA are all different. I never said this was being forced, but you have to admit that the way C&C plays is growing a little stale. Hell, one could argue that for the other studios but the saving grace for everything is the games themselves. I've never said the "C&C formula is bad," but that it's a little stagnant... or dull. It needs some spicing up, but that's really it. Hopefully this new iteration will bring something new to the table. It won't.

Renegade 2 got canned and don't get me started on Tib Incursion. I am so glad Westwood never got to finish that joke of a game. So, happy happy happy...

I think you're missing the point. There's nothing wrong with the way things are going since C&C has been stale for a while. The stark change in Tiberian Twilight was definite proof that the formula is starting to get a bit... dull. It was nice in Red Alert 3 and that was the last time the formula was used to a great degree. Anyway, with the change for free to play, more people can actually enjoy themselves without being forced into purchasing a game. Now, this doesn't mean I don't have reservations about the move to F2P, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with it either. The biggest, and most legitimate, concern is how they structure the game where it concerns those who do not wish to buy anything and only want to experience the game itself. There should be no disadvantage to this and the concern over "paying to win" is valid but if this is not a factor to the game, there's a lot of bluster for nothing really. In any case, if this is such a crime against Command & Conquer, do what everyone else does: don't ****ing play it.

I doubt this will be the case, but I get the idea. If that's how EA approaches the situation, the game will be bad but if they avoid power creep and the "pay to win" scenario, the game a chance of being something special. It might be MP only but that's fine if the game is fun.

Oh here we go again. There is no connection between Red Alert and Tiberium. None. Nada. It don't exist. They can say it all they want but that doesn't make it so, nor does it make any real sense. I don't feel like beating a dead horse but this connection just... isn't there.

The move is fine if they do it right. Like release new armies or factions for $10 or something. New content while making sure the old is still battle capable is a fine idea. They need to watch out for power creep and I have some, but not much, faith in EA to do this well enough that it's not a bad way to enjoy C&C.